Permanent Rumour Thread

[Machine of Loving Grace]

19 minutes ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

As for Pacioretty being clearly unhappy in Montreal and wanting to leave, everything I’ve heard him say points in the other direction. Of course he’s not going to come out and explicitly say he wants out, but it seemed to be apparent common knowledge that he wanted to leave (which I never believed) and now here is he a few days ago saying how he wants to be part of the solution and that he loves it here in Montreal. 

 

Pacioretty loves Montreal and he loves playing for the Habs, but he clearly has issues. As he said to Nilan:

 

Quote

I’m not saying that if they came to me with a contract that I wouldn’t sign it or that I would sign it, but I want to see the Montreal Canadiens be where I think we deserve to be. We have to find answers, players, coaches, management, as to make sure this never happens again….we are hoping things we turn around…Things on the ice have to change for it to make sense to be here.

 

He said that after saying everyone gave 100% and he disagreed with Bergevin on the idea of the team having an attitude problem. Not hard to read between the lines where his issue would be.

[John B]

1 hour ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

Why is I so important for the team to get younger, when it’s already one of the youngest teams in the league? 

For me it's not about the team getting younger.  It's about asset management.  If Pacioretty has an extension signed by the deadline, than I am more than happy with keeping him around.  Otherwise, I would trade him rather than risk getting nothing at all for him if he decides to leave as a free agent.  In hindsight I'm sure we all wish we could have gotten some form of compensation for Radulov or Markov.  Picks and prospects would have been better than the sweet nothing that we have to show for them.

 

I'm hoping they can resign Pacioretty and sign Tavares (all the while finding some miraculous way to fit them both under the cap long term), but that might be asking a lot.

[hab29RETIRED]

1 hour ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

 

Funny enough unless you count Huet the last time they traded a valuable player when close to a playoff spot was Craig Rivet. The 1st they got for it became Pacioretty. 

They needed to also move Souray!! That was a really dumb move!

[hab29RETIRED]

1 hour ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

I'm still pissed off they didn't trade Sheldon Souray. That team had zero chance of doing any damage in the playoffs and Souray's stock was as high as it was ever going to be. Dumb, dumb, dumb.

 

It may indeed be a danger that, if we're on the bubble, it will make our genius GM more reluctant to trade Patches for prospects or young players who risk offering less immediate-term help than Pacioretty would. And also, while deadline pressure can indeed ratchet up return, it can also shrink the number of teams competing for the asset, as non-contenders fall away and the Habs decline to trade him to Conference rivals who they might run into in the playoffs. Coherent long-term vision has never been this management group's strength.

Totally agree and just made same point about Souray.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

1 hour ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

Trading Pacioretty for someone younger will likely change the team’s average age from 26.8 to 26.7. It’s not like we’re going to become extremely younger by trading him because Pacioretty is old.

 

With Price’s, Weber’s and Pacioretty’s age getting up there, this is precisely why we should try to make our team better in the short term without mortgaging the future. Help them win here.

 

I seem to be in the minority but personally that glaring 8 million in cap space is what I would first focus my attention on. Use it wisely and it can help us be a better team now.

 

As for Pacioretty’s value, the argument seems to be that the longer we wait, the lower his value will be. We didn’t trade him this season when teams would get two playoff runs out of him and yet people who said we should trade him this year because our return will likely be better will still want him traded “whenever”. The argument is now that he should be traded ASAP because his value will be higher. Well, this was already the case before.

 

As for Pacioretty himself, I’ve already posted trade proposals with him included, but it seems to go completely over people’s heads that he can still be a helpful piece for another 5-6 years himself. 

 

Trading Pacioretty for a core piece who is also younger can be said for Weber, Price, Pacioretty and even players like Gallagher and Byron. 

 

It’s nice to say that we should trade Pacioretty for a core piece who will help for years to come but the only certainty I see is that Pacioretty himself is a core piece who can help for years to come. Some people are proposing that he should be traded based on a timeline regardless if a beneficial trade is actually available out there. 

 

As for Pacioretty being clearly unhappy in Montreal and wanting to leave, everything I’ve heard him say points in the other direction. Of course he’s not going to come out and explicitly say he wants out, but it seemed to be apparent common knowledge that he wanted to leave (which I never believed) and now here is he a few days ago saying how he wants to be part of the solution and that he loves it here in Montreal. 

 

 

 

I'm not insisting that we trade Patches now or before the deadline, and like you,  I don't agree that "the longer we wait the lower his value will be." I thin k that it one possible outcome but that it's not guaranteed. And if I were the GM and not getting convincing offers for MaxPac, I would indeed wait. That said, waiting entails its own risks.

 

Unlike you, I do not think it likely that Patches has another 5-6 years of elite production in him. I'd say 3-4 years would be a much safer estimate, and it could well be less than that. The game keeps getting faster and I've already noted that I didn't see that extra burst of speed from Patches this year, which he used to have. Nash's game dropped at age 31. I think Patches is entering the danger zone and that we should ship him out rather than lock in on a long-term deal for too much money.

 

Weber and Price are locked up to massive deals. Unlike Patches. So it's a different case in that sense. Also, we have wingers, and zero centremen. It just makes sense to trade Pacioretty to address that positional hole.

 

Again, I'd prefer we trade Patches for a younger player. Who wouldn't? (My pet proposal, again, is Nuge + for Patches).

 

Your observations about MaxPac's comments suggest - what irony! - that he has come to recognize that the GM is inept and wants to see some reason for optimism that things will get better. In other words, he's exerting the "leadership" that some people here have called for from Price and others.

 

In MB's world, this is probably a much more important reason to trade him than anything hockey related. Because, remember the golden rule: managerial ego trumps excellence, every time and all the time, in the Bell Centre Clown Car.

 

 

[Machine of Loving Grace]

Say we don't trade Pacioretty or re-sign him and it's the trade deadline and we suck again.

 

The other forwards who could be available include: Tyler Seguin, Matt Duchene, Jordan Eberle, Jeff Skinner, Mats Zuccarello, Adam Henrique, Wayne Simmonds, and Marcus Johannsen (I went with players on teams who might not be playoff bound or could goto UFA for a bigger contract. No sense adding guys like Pavelski and Couture though if SJ blows up, maybe)

 

So yeah, even if he has a bad season (it didn't stop Nash's value) he should still fetch a first round pick, but does that mean the best package for him is in February?

[DON]

2 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

It's useful because this team has a great big grand total of ZERO elite young players. Its elite players are Price (is 30), Weber (32), and Patches (29).

 

Fixed that for ya. Funny, how all three players had a year added to actual age, to try and make appear older perhaps?

[Metallica]

Oh wow I hate playoff hockey coverage here in Toronto with leaf fans and media. Playoffs just started and they think they won the cup already.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

26 minutes ago, DON said:

Fixed that for ya. Funny, how all three players had a year added to actual age, to try and make appear older perhaps?

 

Actually,  I said that Price WILL BE 31 next year and that future tense, by the logic of the sentence structure, applied to the other ages as well. Next time mind your own frigging business instead of acting like an illiterate twat.

 

Where I was wrong, however, was in forgetting about Drouin. He may or may not turn out to be elite - certainly this season did not impress - but he has to be considered a young guy with at least quasi-elite potential.

[xXx..CK..xXx]

1 hour ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

I'm not insisting that we trade Patches now or before the deadline, and like you,  I don't agree that "the longer we wait the lower his value will be." I thin k that it one possible outcome but that it's not guaranteed. And if I were the GM and not getting convincing offers for MaxPac, I would indeed wait. That said, waiting entails its own risks.

 

Unlike you, I do not think it likely that Patches has another 5-6 years of elite production in him. I'd say 3-4 years would be a much safer estimate, and it could well be less than that. The game keeps getting faster and I've already noted that I didn't see that extra burst of speed from Patches this year, which he used to have. Nash's game dropped at age 31. I think Patches is entering the danger zone and that we should ship him out rather than lock in on a long-term deal for too much money.

 

Weber and Price are locked up to massive deals. Unlike Patches. So it's a different case in that sense. Also, we have wingers, and zero centremen. It just makes sense to trade Pacioretty to address that positional hole.

 

Again, I'd prefer we trade Patches for a younger player. Who wouldn't? (My pet proposal, again, is Nuge + for Patches).

 

Your observations about MaxPac's comments suggest - what irony! - that he has come to recognize that the GM is inept and wants to see some reason for optimism that things will get better. In other words, he's exerting the "leadership" that some people here have called for from Price and others.

 

In MB's world, this is probably a much more important reason to trade him than anything hockey related. Because, remember the golden rule: managerial ego trumps excellence, every time and all the time, in the Bell Centre Clown Car.

 

 

When I look at Max Pacioretty’s statistics, I see a model of consistency. He’s also a player who came back from a broken neck much earlier than anticipated, who’s nickname is Wolverine and so all joking aside, I would have to think that  if any player should defy the odds of recovery and ageing, it would be him. I would firstly assume the best when it comes to him rather than assume the worst. This isn’t even based on wishful thinking in my opinion.

 

Max Pacioretty has never been a purely speed based player in order to accumulate his points. He was/is fast North-South but it was usually to the outside of the rink anyway unless our defense were feeding him breakaways. He scores his points with his lethal shot from inside the offensive zone, and there’s no reason to assume that part of his game will regress in the next 5-6 years.

 

Max Pacioretty is our best player and quite frankly his statistics this year show me that he didn’t have any first line players to play with, not that he’s regressing rapidly. His assist totals are an underrated part of his game and they were much lower this year as well. Max Pacioretty has performed without first line players before, having been centered by Desharnais, but they had chemistry that made Pacioretty’s numbers remain reasonable. Drouin can be a first line player but he doesn’t seem to me to be the type of player to raise the level of other first line players as well. Furthermore, he was in the process of learning a new position.

 

As for trading Pacioretty to get younger, that’s not a good enough reason for me. Age is something similar to character and I would rather skill than age. I’t’s fun to propose acquiring a “younger prospect center” who can be a first line center, but why does any team make that trade for a player with an expiring contract prior to next year’s trade deadline? Perhaps even ever? Surely, there are other options for our team to move forward prior to dealing Pacioretty.

[Metallica]

8 minutes ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

When I look at Max Pacioretty’s statistics, I see a model of consistency. He’s also a player who came back from a broken neck much earlier than anticipated, who’s nickname is Wolverine and so all joking aside, I would have to think that  if any player should defy the odds of recovery and ageing, it would be him. I would firstly assume the best when it comes to him rather than assume the worst. This isn’t even based on wishful thinking in my opinion.

 

Max Pacioretty has never been a purely speed based player in order to accumulate his points. He was/is fast North-South but it was usually to the outside of the rink anyway unless our defense were feeding him breakaways. He scores his points with his lethal shot from inside the offensive zone, and there’s no reason to assume that part of his game will regress in the next 5-6 years.

 

Max Pacioretty is our best player and quite frankly his statistics this year show me that he didn’t have any first line players to play with, not that he’s regressing rapidly. His assist totals are an underrated part of his game and they were much lower this year as well. Max Pacioretty has performed without first line players before, having been centered by Desharnais, but they had chemistry that made Pacioretty’s numbers remain reasonable. Drouin can be a first line player but he doesn’t seem to me to be the type of player to raise the level of other first line players as well. Furthermore, he was in the process of learning a new position.

 

As for trading Pacioretty to get younger, that’s not a good enough reason for me. Age is something similar to character and I would rather skill than age. I’t’s fun to propose acquiring a “younger prospect center” who can be a first line center, but why does any team make that trade for a player with an expiring contract prior to next year’s trade deadline? Perhaps even ever? Surely, there are other options for our team to move forward prior to dealing Pacioretty.

Let me ask you something... Is it going to be worth it giving Pacioretty 7-9mil a year?? 

[xXx..CK..xXx]

11 minutes ago, Metallica said:

Let me ask you something... Is it going to be worth it giving Pacioretty 7-9mil a year?? 

I’m probably the wrong person to ask because I also would have paid Radulov more to stay in Montreal and even said that beforehand. Max Pacioretty deserves 6-7.x million wherever he ends up and the 9 million figure is one I’ve never heard.

 

With that being said, the cap is going up and the amount of cap space should be the least of our worries after seeing what transpired this year. I would pay Pacioretty 7 million. He’s our best player. 

 

I’m not opposed to actually trading Pacioretty for a nice return. What I do see is that people come up with reason after reason that he should be traded without any of it being necessarily factual. 

 

 

1) He’s regressing

—> what if he’s not?

 

2) he won’t resign with us anyway

—> he loves it here?

 

3) he’s not worth 9 million

—> he’s signing for 6.9?

 

4) it’s because he’s old

 

etc. etc. etc.

 

If it comes down to it, trading him is fine but people have made up a lot of things about him as well, and given them as reasons he should be traded. 

 

 

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Pacioretty is an excellent hockey player. No argument there.

 

None of us ultimately know when he will get old and regress, so it's guesswork.  I do think that Patches in the past did rely on an extra burst of speed to get around defenders on the outside. I didn't see that as much this season and take it as a slightly unsettling sign. That said, I am not predicting an overnight collapse in his game. More likely his unproductive stretches will gradually extend over longer periods until the hot streaks start to look like rarities.

 

Ultimately, though, the real reason to trade him is to get a C. If we somehow acquire two legitimate top-6 C by other means, then I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to re-signing Pacioretty...although I don't believe for one moment that he will accept anything less than full market value, after his agent hosed him last time. And who can blame him.

 

 

[Metallica]

Well I said 7-9 because isn't that the average now in today's NHL. Kessle is at 6.8mil so you would think being similar type of players he would want 7+.

[Commandant]

Look around the NHL.  How many of the leagues top scorers are in their 30s.  (yes there are a few, but its rare).

 

How many of the guys who used to be top scorers, but are now on the decline, started that decline in their early 30s. 

 

The league has changed, and prime for forwards is skewing younger and younger. 

 

I like Pacioretty.  He's probably got 2-3 good years in him.... but I trade him now.  I want no part of a 7 or 8 year extension at big money. 

[IN THE HEARTS OF MEN]

Personally I think nothing has changed...  the elite are the elite in 2018 just as it was in 2008. I think the mis conception here is age and speed... the league is faster now slower players are out for faster players. If you can skate you’ll still be in the NHL in 2018 regardless of age.

 

for example

 

Out of the top 20 scorers this year 10 of 20 are older then 28 or past there UFA year.

tavares is 27y

4 are 22y and under

5 are 25/26y

 

is there a difference from 10 years ago 2008?

 

Out of top 20 in 2008

7 were 28 and over

3 were 22 and under

10 were 23-27

 

The average age of the nhl has gone up 1 year over the last 10... however there has been a significant bump in players under 26 most of it having to do with quality of draft and More importantly the management of the salary cap!  

 

30 yrs old plus in top 40 scorers

 

2018– 9

2017– 9

2016– 12

2015– 11

2014– 7

2013– 9 lockout

2012– 13

2011– 12

2010– 6

2009–10

2008– 11

 

Speed and salary cap  and quality of draft class...

[Commandant]

All i see in that post is that  ~25% of the top 40 scorers are over the age of 30.

 

Which still tells me I don't want to bet a 7 or 8 year deal on Pacioretty.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

49 minutes ago, Commandant said:

All i see in that post is that  ~25% of the top 40 scorers are over the age of 30.

 

Which still tells me I don't want to bet a 7 or 8 year deal on Pacioretty.

 

Indeed. Trade him to a contender and get back major young assets. That's what any sensible team would do, given that the Habs have zero chance of winning the Cup within the next couple of seasons. Not only will Pacioretty be entering the "danger zone" age-wise, but this team has cataclysmic positional holes everywhere except at G and W. Trade a winger to get C or D (or both). Common sense if you ask me.

[xXx..CK..xXx]

34 minutes ago, Commandant said:

All i see in that post is that  ~25% of the top 40 scorers are over the age of 30.

 

Which still tells me I don't want to bet a 7 or 8 year deal on Pacioretty.

Again, no one said he is getting an 8 year deal so it defeats the majority of the argument. 

[xXx..CK..xXx]

24 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Indeed. Trade him to a contender and get back major young assets. That's what any sensible team would do, given that the Habs have zero chance of winning the Cup within the next couple of seasons. Not only will Pacioretty be entering the "danger zone" age-wise, but this team has cataclysmic positional holes everywhere except at G and W. Trade a winger to get C or D (or both). Common sense if you ask me.

Is it common sense for Carolina to trade Jeff Skinner? 

[xXx..CK..xXx]

It’s a self fulfilling prophecy to me.

 

If we do trade Pacioretty for a younger asset, it’s true that it may help us in the long term but it will also solidify the fact that we won’t be able to win for a few years. It actually will be part of the reason. Things won’t look too different to those who knew we couldn’t be competitive anyway but again, trading Pacioretty for young assets and nothing yet proven will have been a major part of othe reason for our short term woes.

 

On the other hand, those who think we can turn things around in the short term without completely derailing the future are looked at with a funny eye. 

 

I do admit that as a fan I don’t want to go through more seasons like this one and it is indeed part of the reason I don’t want to trade Pacioretty without a proven player coming back the other way. But I don’t think my fandom has made me overly blind in thinking that it’s possible to turn things around.

 

I’m fine with a Pacioretty trade, although I don’t see it happening, but there are once again other avenues I would explore before trading him. I also don’t understand why people think it’s going to happen any time soon. At this point, I find the likeliest time a deal would be made to be next year’s deadline.

 

As “smart fans”, some people might simply worry that this would be a mistake, because if we are in a competitive position next deadline, we may end up not trading Pacioretty at all and either lose him for nothing, or sign him to an unwanted extension. But I will never be able to be on the same page as those fans. I’ll be happy we’re competitive next year if it were so.

[Commandant]

1 hour ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

Again, no one said he is getting an 8 year deal so it defeats the majority of the argument. 

 

If you think he and his agent aren't shooting for the moon, after the last deal massively underpaid him, you are deluding yourself. 

 

He's looking for a home run here, and if he doesn't get it from the Habs (or whatever team he is playing with next season), he is going to July 1st. 

 

There is almost zero chance he signs any deal that is a home town discount in dollars or term. 

 

There have been many rumours over the years that Pacioretty is looking for his next deal to be a big one... and the fact that he fired the agent who negotiated his last deal less than a year into it, is compelling evidence that he isn't happy with his current contract. 

[xXx..CK..xXx]

47 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

If you think he and his agent aren't shooting for the moon, after the last deal massively underpaid him, you are deluding yourself. 

 

He's looking for a home run here, and if he doesn't get it from the Habs (or whatever team he is playing with next season), he is going to July 1st. 

 

There is almost zero chance he signs any deal that is a home town discount in dollars or term. 

 

There have been many rumours over the years that Pacioretty is looking for his next deal to be a big one... and the fact that he fired the agent who negotiated his last deal less than a year into it, is compelling evidence that he isn't happy with his current contract. 

On one hand Pacioretty is our best player. On the other hand, depending on what the moon is, I don’t see how he can demand it when he had a season like he did this year. He is not McDavid. He is not even Taylor Hall who makes 6 million dollars a year. 

 

I think Pacioretty deserves 7 million because it is indeed a veteran contract and I don’t see the cap as an issue on our team for the next few seasons. I don’t think it’s a given he gets 8 years.

 

Even if he did get 8 years, I find it convenient that if we traded Pacioretty to a team this off season, they would be able to find a way to ship him out for value at the trade deadline, yet if we resigned Pacioretty, it’s always out of the question that we could still trade him a few years into his new contract for value in return. 

 

The argument will then be “but his 64 million 8 year contract will be basically untradeable because it’s an albatross.” If that’s the case, then I doubt any team actually signs him to that in the first place.

 

People are overthinking things and developing reasons to worry about Pacioretty before it actually happens. Of course this is called foresight but I don’t agree with all that is envisioned. 

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Think positionally. This team has W. The ONLY area where it has anything like depth is at W. Meanwhile, it has the weakest C configuration in hockey and a laughable dearth of puck-moving defenders on the left side. Patches is at the end of his tenure as a cheap contract and is entering a period of his career where he is likely to decline, long before his new contract expires. You have to trade from your area of relative strength to address gaping chasms in the roster.

[Commandant]

5 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

Think positionally. This team has W. The ONLY area where it has anything like depth is at W. Meanwhile, it has the weakest C configuration in hockey and a laughable dearth of puck-moving defenders on the left side. Patches is at the end of his tenure as a cheap contract and is entering a period of his career where he is likely to decline, long before his new contract expires. You have to trade from your area of relative strength to address gaping chasms in the roster.

 

BINGO!

 

He is by far, by a country mile, the best trade chip to address the team's current needs.  Nothing else comes close to being both replaceable internally, and valuable externally.